Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVR-85-0000 - Supplemental - 0408 Shelburne Roadf, NOTICE OF APPEAL i SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Name, address and telephone # of applicant zz Name, address of property owner Property location and description �,'v or C_ T__ A-e -e- I hereby appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for the following: conditional use, variance or decision of the administrative officer. I understand the meetings are held twice a month (second and fourth Mondays). The legal advertisement must appear a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the hearing. I agree to pay the hearing fee of $30.00 which is to off -set the cost of the hearing. 12 Hearing Date gnature of Appellant Do not write below this line ---------------------------=----------------------------------------------------------- SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regulations and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on , 2 at (day of week) (month and date) time to consider the following: t'L Appeal of seeking ar a_s� , from Section of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for permission to �e,Ir�/a.� 4.. �� .l, 7 z 71 '::;� ? . �,' John P. Larkin 1185 Shelburne Rd. S. Burlington, VT 054o1 Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator City of S. Burlington 575 Dorset St. S. Burlington, VT 054o1 Re: Proposed Office Building, 408 Shelburne Rd. Richard This letter is to help clear up the confusion about this project. We are still actively pursuing the permits for the office building, and are formally withdrawing any alternate applications (Pearl Sports). We request that this item be removed from the agenda of the June 23 Zoning Board meeting. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused. Sin6erel� Jo Larkin No Text Y'" N RIIRLINQT� Y. _ r City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 '� ee ' FAX 658-4748 ~tG A row" M�R�.A PLANNER ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7955 658-7958 Q e r� RAs�l Dc�4k V vr oS401 .� `� wr✓ �Is��ss�s� i'�1c-L�Y'l4c�N�l�SiID Is ILt E lq o 12�L CAD N C=. I Ceti/ -(I D,J 6 ,4?Pu c flT t o �S . �t_C/�S>G S.� (� t T A r rTzs2 x d inJ t,j G- Aw ` ou(L A069t_ I <-A-Q Otn 'DTI 5 i Ie-:> PC)P-c (De C_ 0 n)0 \'t1 a"j S L I S-t,E 0 1.4 —1 �kc I'Lko &' J�6'ti-J k- A(c k l,) �I PCc-L'T �Y� ck-� I --RA MEMORANDUM TO: To Whom It May Concern FROM: Joe Weith, City Planner RE: Amendment of Planning Commission Approvals DATE: March 11, 1993 The Planning Commission is not required to consider an application for a property where it has previously denied approval for development of the property or has approved development of the property subject to conditions unless one of the following exists: 1. a substantial change of conditions or other considerations materially affecting the merits of the case has occurred since the first application; 2. the applicant has substantially changed the application to respond to objections raised in the original application; 3. the applicant has agreed to comply with conditions which the Planning Commission is authorized to impose. It is the applicant's burden of proof to demonstrate that one of these conditions is satisfied at the time of the application. (amend) June 10, 1986 Mr. John Larkin 1185 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Zoning hearing Dear Mr. Larkin: Be advised that the Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, June 23, 1986 at 5:00 P.M. to consider your request for a zoning variance. Please be sure to attend this meeting. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp SOUTH BURLINCsTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlinggton Zoning Regulations and Choptar 1) 7, Title 24 V.S.A. r the South Burlington Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a Ppublic hearing at the South Bur ngton Municipal Offices, Can (erence Room, 575 Dorsr I Street, South Burlington, Vermor I on Monday, June 23, 1986, c 5:00 p.m. to consider the follow- ing: 1 M 1 Appeal of Clyde C. Devoid, Jr. seekingg a variance, from Sec_ Lion 18.00, Dimensional require- ments of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for per- . i mission to demolish on existing 11'.6" x 33'.6" attached garage and 12' x 21'.6" shed and con- struct a 24' x 24' detached ga- rage to within three and one half (3.6) feet of the westerly side yard and nine (9) feet of the rear yard, of 1930 Williston Road. M2 Appeal of Alfred Leda, seek- ing approval, from Section 6.30, Conditional uses sub section 6.301 (additional dwelling for farm use) of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for per- mission to construct a 30' x 60, single-family dwelling on a par- cel containing 8.2 acres which Part of an existing farm con- taining 101 acres within South Burlington and undetermined iacreage within the Town of Shel. burne, located at 495 Cheese - factory Road. M3 Appeal of University of Ver- mont, Linda Sao vey agent Seek - approval, from Section 18.112, sub section E, Height of Istructures of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for per- mission to construct a 60 foot farm silo at the Wheelock farm site, 1251 Spear Sheet. N4 Appeal of Gary Farrell and The Davis Company seeking ap- proval, from Section 12.20, Con- ditional uses and Section 1965. Multiple uses of the South Bur- lington Regulations. Request i for permission to occupy an existing structure containing 26, 250 square feet with a maxi- mum of six (6) tenants, ggeneral uses being storage and distribu- Lion, wholesale establishments, manufacturing with associated retaiimg and business offices on oini o lot cntang two (2) acres, locatod at 10 Farrell Road. +s5 Appeal of John Larkin seek 119- 1ngg a variance, from Section Multiple uses of the South Burlington Regulations. Re- quest is for permission to con. I struct a 48' x 72'-2 story office - retail complex in conjunction with on existing restaurant on a lot containing 1.25 acres, located at 408 Shelburne Road. Richard Word, Zoning Administrative Officer June 7, 1986 XZ--y A 000 SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONING NOTICE In accordance with the South Burlington Zoning Regula- tions and Chapter 117, Title 24 V.S.A. the South Burlington Zon- ing Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington Municipal Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Monday, December 9, 1985, at 5:00 P.M. to consider the following: M 1. Appeal of Pivagalli Devel- opment Company, Douglas Schner agent seeking a variance, from Section 18.00, Dimensional Requirements of the South fJur- lington Regulations. Request is for permission to construct a pe- destrian passageway between an existing and proposed office complex, creating zero east -west side yards, located at 35-55 Joy Drive. 1_ 02. Appeal of John P. Larkin seeking appfsrovol, from Section 19.65, Multiple uses of the South Burlington Regulations. Request is for ppermission to construct a 48'x72', 2 story office complex in conjunction with on existing restaurant on, a lot contommy 1.25 acres, located at 408 Shel- burne Road. Richard Word Zoning Administrative Officer November 23, 1985 November 25, 1985 Mr. John Larkin 1185 Shelburne Road South Burlinqton, Vermont 05401 Re: Zoning appeal Dear John: Be advised that the Zoning Board of Adjustment will hold a public hearing at the City Offices, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street on Monday, December 9, 1985 at 5:00 P.M. to consider your request for a zoning appeal. Please plan to attend this hearing. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp LARKIN, John 408 Shelburne Road Area zoned C-1 District Section 19.65 Conditional use Existing use - restaurant d.b.a. Fish Banke- standard restaurant permitted Section 11.104 Proposed use - professional oftice-permitted Section 11.101 Proposed 2 story, 48' x 72' office complex Lot size 54,550 square feet with 240 feet minimum required 40,000 square feet with 200 feet Conditional use review under Section 19.05 -To ck?,cu�- FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services The Kiln • 15 Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000 11 March 1986 Mr. Robert G. Blanchard R.G. Blanchard Design Associates 23 College Parkway Winooski, Vermont 05404 RE: Traffic Impact Evaluation -Proposed Restaurant & Office Building 408 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont FILE: 85155 Dear Mr. Blanchard: At your request we have analyzed the potential traffic impacts of the above -referenced Project. Based on information from your office, this Project will consist of a new two-story office building (6,900 square feet) which will be constructed behind the existing restaurant (2,500 square feet). Two major areas of concern to local officials are addressed herein; Traffic Congestion and Traffic Safety. In our preliminary discussions with local officials concerning the scope of this evaluation, the study limits were defined to include both the Shelburne Road/Flynn Avenue intersection and the intersection of Shelburne Road and the access to this Project. The objective of this evaluation is to identify and assess potential traffic impacts created by this Project in each of the above areas of concern, for both existing and future traffic conditions. TRAFFIC CONGESTIOM Information regarding existing traffic volumes on Shelburne Road within the study area was obtained from the following sources: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count, Shelburne Road, Station D270 (north of Home Avenue), Vt. Agency of Transportation, February 6-16, 1984. 2. Turning Movement Count, Shelburne Road/Flynn Avenue, FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Incorporated, March 4, 1936. Copies of these counts are enclosed as Appendices A-B, respectively. Design 0 Inspection 0 Studies 0 Permitting Nr. Robert G. Blanchard FILE: 85155 11 March 1986 Page Two The results of the above -referenced traffic counts were used to develop existing (1986) average daily traffic volumes (ADT) and design hourly volumes (DHV) on Shelburne Road. Growth factors and DHV/ADT ratios used to adjust the data to 1986 conditions were obtained from Vermont Agency of Transportation data. The DHV is defined as the 30th highest hourly traffic volume ocurring on an annual basis, and is used as a design parameter in the design of highways, intersections and traffic control Systems. The D11V typically occurs on a weekday during the P.M. peak hour from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Once existing background traffic volumes were determined, it was necessary to estimate the volumes and directional patterns of the additional vehicular traffic which this Project will generate. The major determinant of the volume of traffic which will be generated by this Project is the amount of gross leaseable floor area. In this Project, the restaurant has existed on this site since the early 19701s, and the traffic generated by it can be considered to be "existing" traffic. Land use categories "General Office, Under 100,00 G.S.F.(LUC 711), and "High Turnover, Sit -Down Restaurant (LUC 832), from the "ITE Informational Report, Trip Generation, 3rd Edition", were used to estimate the additional volumes of traffic generated by this Project. Table 1, below, outlines the proposed vehicular trip volumes which will result upon completion of this Project. TABLE 1 PROJECTED VEHICULAR TRIP VOLUMES OFFICE RESTAURANT TOTAL Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends 122 VPD 411 VPD 533 VPD A.M. Peak Hour Enter 15 VPH 0 VPH 15 VPH Exit 3 0 3 TOTAL 18 VPH 0 VPH 18 VPH P.M. Peak Hour Enter 3 VPH 19 VPH 22 VPH Exit 17 7 24 TOTAL 20 VPH 26 VPH 46 VPH FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Robert G. Blanchard FILE: 85155 11 March 1986 Page Three The above traffic volumes were compared to the maximum vehicular trip generation allowed by the Traffic Overlay District (T.O.D.) of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. This lot is located within Zone 5 of the T.O.D., which allows a maximum of 45 vehicular trip ends per 40,000 sq.ft. of lot size during the P.M. peak hour. Based on information from your office, this lot's area equals 54,550 sq.ft. which would equate to a maximum allowable vehicular trip generation rate of 61 vph. The directional distribution of traffic entering and exiting the Project was estimated from existing traffic patterns. Presently during the P.M. peak hour, 57% of Shelburne Road traffic is southbound and 113% northbound. Thus, it was estimated that 57% of all traffic generated by this Project will enter from the north and exit to the south, and the remainder in the opposite directions. This directional distribution also establishes a "worst -case scenario" with respect to left -turning vehicles, which encounter greater delays due to other traffic. Since traffic flow on a street network is typically limited by available capacities at intersections, potential traffic congestion impacts of this Project were determined by performing intersection capacity analyses at the two aforementioned intersections. The methodology used to determine intersection capacity and operating level of service was obtained from the "Highway -Ca acity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 1935". Traffic conditions were analyzed using existing (1986) DHV's both with and without this Project. The results of the Shelburne Road/Flynn Avenue intersection capacity analyses indicate that this intersection will operate at Level of Service C, both with and without this Project. This level of service, at a signalized intersection, is characterized by average vehicular delays of 16-25 seconds/vehicle and by a minimal number of individual cycle failures. Appendix C outlines the results of the Shelburne Road/Flynn Avenue intersection capacity analyses. The results of the Shelburne Road/Project intersection capacity analyses also indicate that Level of Service C conditions will prevail on Shelburne Road. Delays encountered by exiting traffic, due to their having to yield right-of-way to other vehicles, will result in Level of Service E conditions at the Project's exit. This marginal level of service is created primarily by the left -turning exiting vehicles. If separate right and left -turn exit lanes are provided, the right turn exit movement will improve to Level of Service A, with the left turn exit remaining at Level of Service E. Appendix D outlines the results of the Shelburne Road/Project intersection capacity analyses. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Robert G. Blanchard FILE: 85155 11 March 1986 Page Four TRAFFIC SAFETY The safety of vehicular traffic traveling to and from this Project is largely dependent on the geometries and physical conditions of adjacent streets and intersections, traffic volumes, and on the presence of adequate traffic control devices. Shelburne Road, within the study area, has excellent geometries and sight distances. The existence of numerous intersections and driveways, coupled with high traffic volumes on Shelburne Road, create a high potential for traffic accidents. The most recent five-year accident history (1980-84) between Flynn Avenue and Home Avenue was obtained from the VAOT. These records list a total of 132 accidents at, and between, these two intersections during the five-year period. Of the 132 accidents, 32 occurred at the Shelburne Road/Home Avenue intersection, 44 occurred at the Shelburne Road/Flynn Avenue & Proctor Avenue intersection, and the remaining 56 between these two intersections. Less than one-third of the above accidents involved personal injury. As can be expected, the majority of these accidents were rear end collisions or involved turning movements. Almost two-thirds of the accidents were caused by failure to yield right-of-way, following too close, or operator inattention. When compared to the statewide accident rate on urban federal aid primary highways, this segment of Shelburne Road has a higher than average accident rate, but did not exceed the critical accident tate. If the latter had been exceeded, statistically, this portion of Shelburne Road would have been classified as a high accident location. Given the geometric conditions and accident history of Shelburne Road within the study area, and the relatively small additional traffic volumes generated by this Project, there is no reason to conclude that this Project will cause an adverse impact with respect to traffic safety. CONCLUSION This report has evaluated potential traffic impacts resulting from the construction of a 6,900 square feet office building at 408 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. This Project will not increase existing levels of traffic congestion on Shelburne Road. Existing (1986) design hour traffic volumes were utilized to determine intersection capacities and operating levels of service at the two intersections within the study area. Overall, DHV traffic conditions on Shelburne Road within this area presently operate at Level of Service C, and will continue to do so upon completion of this Project. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Robert G. Blanchard FILE: 85155 11 March 1986 Page Five Traffic safety was evaluated by examining geometric conditions and the most recent five-year accident history of Shelburne Road between Home and Flynn Avenues. No indication was found of any significant adverse impacts being created by this Project upon existing traffic safety conditions. We wish to thank you for this opportunity to be of service, and remain available to present the results of this evaluation to local officials, if desired. Should you have any questions, or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, FITZPATRIC%K-�-LL WELLYN INCORPORATED Roger id. Dickinson, P.E. cc Jane LaFleur FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services APPENDIX A AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC RECORDER COUNT SHELUMNE ROAD - STATION D270 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services MJt;T AJ_!,:" r0= TP.ANSPOaTATI ON PROJECT PLANNING DIVISION TRAFFIC RESEARCH SEIr i`ION TOWN: �1� FVv, E1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 a) M.F- :- 0 r _ o 4-4 S- ROUTE: COUNTERe1- 69 NUMBER: w STATION I NUMBER: Ta17a I 7rHou ? -+ ? 56- ? -+ 12-1 .+ 147•+ 230-+ 380. + I 1- .+ 13 -+ 250• .+ 2-3 ,+ .+ 61-+ 64-+ 110. -+ ? -c 2 .+ 54-+ 55-+ 48-+ 62• 41.+ 36.+ 4-5 C� .+ 120-+ 98•+ 00-+ 44•+ ??-+ 5-6 .+46112 449-+ 466-+ 169• -+ .+ 6-7 .+ 1 286-+ 1 267•+ 1 353-+ 221-+ 1 308-+ 11 ? •+ 7-P .+ 1 488-+ 1 564-+ 1 4 7 9 - + 333•+ .+ .+ -9 .+ 1 127-+ 1 115•+ 09.+ 558-+ .+ — .+ 340• 67 -+ 1 088. 997-+ 1 181-+ 1 139808-+ .+ I .+ 10-11' 14»fl• .t �169.f 1 376-+ _I "Q� 1 432. 78-+ 1 356-+ .+I ? 2 I ? 11_l 1 290-+ 1 509-+ 1 479- -+I .+ 12-1 ?-+ 1 30 .+ i 379- ?� .+ 1 553-+ 1 533- 1 22 -+ .+ -2 ? -+ 1 297-+ 1 419.4 1 399-+ 1 576•+ 1 508- 1 ? 2.+ -+ _ 1 408•+ 1 377-+ 1 529.4 1 456-+ 1 625-+ 1 410. 1 175-+ .+ 1 598-+ 3-4- 1 592-+ 1 599•+ 1 677- 1 617-+ 1 809-+ 1 419.1 1 143-+ 1 717-+ 1 670.+ _ 1 444•+ 1 550.+M654- 1 508•+ -+ 1'141-+ 1 593-+ 1 689•+ 5-6 .+ .+09 -+ 1 378.+ 8 .+ .+ .+ 9_7 834-+ 887-+ 961- 1 209-+ 664-+ 1 12-+ 949-+ 7-8_ 648-+ 600-+ 694• 977•+ 5b9•+I 7 .+ 31-+ - 546•+ 573.+ 616- 887-+ 447.+ .+ 619.+ Q- Q 392-+ 439•+ 519- 590-+ 303-+I 400•+ 1 430•+ 10-11 315-+ 308-+ 8- -+ 259-+ 252-+ 386-+ 1-19 I 13 492- 66-* 20 503- c r.• � R _ . 05 - 21088-* 5 •* } iota � DATA SUMARY /d• is Day of Week Da*ly Volumes Week # Total Ave. Day 1 2 3 4 r u n a v 14Zql .Monday al o g % o Tuesday s45 Wednesday 2eso3 Zo833 Thurs d 2D Frida S Saturdav 09 lotal of Average Days Without Weekend With Weekend 3 � Adjusted Average Day Without Weekend 2.1 i-zn ee en q 0 Route"ClassTficataori: en ac r W WkendjrT93Factorl,� 19 04 AADT z3,22o Remarks: -, Revised November 1981 APPE_NDI_X B TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SHELBURNE ROAD/FLYNN AVENUE FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services TURNING MOVEMENT DATA SHEEt CODE NO.: 860 "1 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED, PACE: Engineering & Planning Services DIR PC T TOT DIR PC 1. T TOT HR DIR PC T TOT HR I 10 I _ 12 jot( 0104 10 _ I "IDS I I'1Q_ $ 13 13 Isis h 15 d31 I a3 3 3 IG4s a I 13 _ M �7 TOT L/r7 IDIR a yq TOT qU) a qo3 TOT 35 O_ 3s wj M Ll PC T TOT DIR PC T TOT HR II II Iwo II II 13 ICI is 16iG , a 1 16 _ )�Iq 1 `6 Is 1 I I `I 1G � NOR IN II II i �s 14. F. S'7 PC /3 3 T 6 u TOT TOT DIR ¢ I 13 TOT DIR PC T TOT tIR, p .— 161G i 6 l02 2 �� 163U1 /0 ---• �LItiN Z}vc SHCkV1/)"- Wi L4.I AVA5 l �(3 PC y2 U T I y3 TOT I TOT DIR N3 5 P u.F-.'ICI c� 2 Cif TOT I HR TOT DIR PC T 1 7 15 15 I i5 l`6 Irk 163� F,a 1 G3 PP.K _, $9 I6'1S 1943G 'DNv-_ 235a � WJ- = 9y . l75 PCs All passenger cars and 2-axle,4-lire trucks 1 '�SCJ TOT T I Medium and heavytrucks and busses. T TOT HR DIR DIR PC T I SOT` DIRKqq TOT PC T TOT HR �6 Eau a7 a a 3 1 q Cl -- y N 615 2� I 5 LI 1 15o ". '3 3 ao ci 0 N I I I6�-15 5 2 a 3 O 0 Va o N X s 17 )% TOT I'] /05 TOT 769 1L�L g( TOT APPENDIX C INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSES SHELBURNE ROAD/FLYNN AVENUE FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-75 INPUT WORKSHEET C f LYN iv Intersection: �'fl1=i3U12tyE �9 N VC . Date: � ENV 0 w�'�Pol. Analyst: -J� J �) Time Period Analyzed: N - S prr Area Type: ❑ CBD Other Project No.: �jO0t9 /� 5G5 City/State: BLAV2 I-) i`Vr'YV1,)1 VOLUME AND GEOMETRICS �-a ' 1?, / N/S STREET 51 SB TOTAL rJG + 4 0 I I 6� r WB TOTAL 1105 t NORTH I D , _ IDENTIFY IN DIAGRAM: 1. volumes I Fcy/vN /J✓E E/W STREET 2. lanes, lone widths 3. Movements by lane 4. Parking (PKG) locations 5. Bay storage lengths f J p 6. Islands (physical or painted) 7. Bus stops EB TOTAL 2o la Ili NBTOTAL TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS Approach Grade M % f1v Ad'. Pkg. Lane Buses (Nd) PHF Conf. Peds. Pedestrian Button Arr. Y N N,,, or (peds./hr) Y or N Min. Timing Type EB WB - J ok ��/� /V U �' A) NB 3 n _ SB 0 Grade: + up, — down NB: buses stopping/hr Min. Timing: min. green for IIV: veh. with more than 4 wheels PHF: peak -hour factor pedestrian crossing Nm: pkg. maneuvers/hr Conf. Peds: Conflicting peds./hr Arr. Type: Type 1-5 PHASING D I G R1IN I l R �y ! --- A M Timing G= )v Y+R=�/ G= 3 Y+R=U G=L12 Y+R=3 I G= I Y+R=3 G= Y+R= G= Y+R= G= Y+R= G= Y+R= Pretimed or Actuated� P -P —� Protected turns __._% Permitted turns —______Pedestrian Cycle Length 90 Sec 9-76 URBAN STREETS VOLUME ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET O U V G ppr. Mvt. Mvt. Peak v Flow Rate (e) Lane Group n Flow rate in Lane Number of Lanes Lane Utilization Adj. Flow tt Prop. of Volume Hour (vph) Factor vpp Group N Factor U v LT (vph) P,. or RT or P., PHF (vp-h) ® vs (vph) Table 9-4 0 X OO LT EB TH jq0 1.UU (yU t RT 207 ,`54 �y6 '-�, y6 I 1.0C) /� oCy I UU `k Rr LT WB TH �1 ��1 r%� `- ��� (.UU 167 37"/A9,T RT 5 al Lj 1yL LT NB TH a�`c� ,'�Li 10()q 1av 2 1,05 �% cr RT LT I L-1 o I, V,`{ I q(ir 3 °/. L.T SB TH j(L)S� (31 5 �j`� ��13U 1,05 1)5()g- RT 1 5(, 119q 1 6 )"-= 10 4 -soq cl K. Ut> Iq0 C) UL,c-53c� 13 02 uk SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-77 SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET LANE GROUPS @ Ideal Sat. Flow (pcphgpl) No. of Lanes N ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ,® Adj. Sat. Flow Rate 8 (vphg) O Appr. ® Lane Group Movements Lane Width f„, © Heavy Veh f v (Y) Grade f Pkg. f 1) Bus Blockage fbb (9 Area Type fa 11 Right Turn fRT '® Left Turn fl T Table 9-5 Table 9-6 Table 9-7 Table 9-8 Table 9-9 Table 9-10 Table 9-11 Table 9-12 EB _ , (�C)U , q r---� 0 ( to (.UU 1,00 WB �'� — ) I ,�3 I,U� 1,01 1,00 I,u(} I,00 .9`1 6(, IUHO �lI�Uc� i Ito cf� 1.00 I.uo I.Uo 1_00 I.uv .GLI 11911 NB f I�oo ( I,Uo `IDS I,W I,UU (,UU I.u0 1q6 SB EJ �00 I.uu I.vv I.uo (.00 I,uo I,uo qq �I 3)q3 4-78 URBAN STREETS SUPPLEMENTAL WORKSHEET FOR LEFT -TURN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR, fLT INPUT VARIABLES EB WB NB SB Cycle Length, C (sec) 1� 0 c6O �6 O 'S O Effective Green, g (sec) Number of Lanes, N I Total Approach Flow Rate, v, (vph) 16i q L4 5 I H 3 U Mainline Flow Rate, v,,, (vph) 3$6 `66 aLI S 1H30 Left -Turn Flow Rate, v,, (vph) 1741 71 Proportion of LT, P,_T 0, . �3 Opposing Lanes, N. a2 Opposing Flow Rate, vo (vph) H 3 0 g35 Prop. of LT in Opp. Vol., Pur, `-I 9 , 03 0 COMPUTATIONS EB WB NB SB _ 1800 N„ S"c 1 +P,To [400 + v, 1400—v,,, �JUS 33i i Y. = v,. / S„ �, � . � a�6 , � I G g.=(g—CY„)/(1—Y) �.��5 �5.�7 f, _ (875 — 0.625 v„) / 1000 3`4 Ic=PST I1+(N-1)g f& +4.5 C �J� ,LA gy=g—g. x 5 '6. a3 PT=I —PL 91 = 2 P, C1 — PT P, 0.5 g41 JJ I 3'� e( EL = 1800 / (1400 — v„) 16 fm=gi.+9. g g l C -I -�(1+.P1) l + P, (E, fir=(fm+N— 1)/N Syk ,RI sg6) qg q5 ( ► 3) �, SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-79 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LANE GROUP ® Adj. O AftSat. Aft ® Flow ® Green Lane Grou © v/c atio Os Critical ? Lane Group Flow Rate Rate Ratio /s Ratio g/C CapacityR x Q — 0 Lane Appr. Movements v (vph) s (vphg) O — ® (vph) C x 6 Group EB B I`-/U 9,1 10 U7 WB -- 16�1 IU�I� J59 I25 gd3 776 , /e6 NB %�� Avg3 7y . G2,b 6 �s la(`.Y� 911 f SB d� Cycle Length, C sec I (V/s), _ I Lost Time Per Cycle, L _ (� sec x, _(V/S)Ci_ C—L )-gQ URBAN STREETS LEVEIGOILSERVICE WORKSHEET Lane Group .First Term Delay Second Term Delay Tbtal Delay & LOS O Appr. ® Lane Group Move- ments O v/c Ratio X O Green Ratio g/C ® Cycle Length C (sec) © Delay d, (sec/veh) O Lane Group Capacity c. (vph) O Delay dz (sec/veh) O Progression Factor PF Table 9-13 O Lane Group Delay (sec/veh) (©+®) X (1 » Lane Group LOS Table 9-1 @ Approach Delay (sec/veh) 0 Appr. LOS Table 9-1 Ell a I, I C z _� .6��r a2,0 alo 5. 3 1,00 0 -y 5yr; 3'J'15 16, y H 1 I,UC) 17.5 C wB �, '7H9iz5 �v 9 1,u0 31.3 NB '776 O L� v'3� Q 1q. I 1B ;� .4� I ,C8?5 Sv '7. 1 C� 19100 1. b (, 00 �5.5 C SB rt� ,56� 5z5 tv Ia.$ 1703 '4. 1,00 )7-0 C Intersection Delay _1 ► sec/veh Intersection LOS C (Table 9-1) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-75 INPUT WORKSHEET Intersection: SHC-LZ(A ANE 4 FLY IV AVE Date: 1��� 914V L,' P1�WECT Analyst: � � � Time Period Analyzed: 9 5 Fm Area Type: ❑ CBD V1 Other Project No.: City/State: '&uRLING-Tyi\1 I �1T, VOLUME AND GEOMETRICS 54cL A "�D N/S STREET I a I 9, 1 51 SB TOOTAL 56 ` `. 4 U r WB TOTAL F1 I NORTH S)) IDENTIFY IN DIAGRAM: 1. Volumes r"t.Y�'v�',/' ���� E/W STREET 2. Lanes, lane widths / C1 l� c/o 7 3. Movements by lane } /ate aC) 4. Parking (PKG) locations 5. Bay storage lengths . / U G —� I I 3a'7 t 1u4� 6. Islands (physical or painted) 7. Bus stops EB TOTAL d01 NB TOTAL TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS Approach Grade % HV Adj. Pk . Lane Buses PHF Conf. Peds. Pedestrian Button Arr. Y or N Nm Y or N Min. Timing 0.) (NO) (peds. hr) Type EB WB S rnE� NB SB Grade: + up, — down Ns: buses stopping/hr Min. Timing: min. green for HV. veh. with more than 4 wheels PHF: peak -hour factor pedestrian crossing Nm: pkg. maneuvers/hr Conf. Peds: Conflicting peds./hr Arr. Type: Type 1-5 PHASING D I A G lE..- R --_ A M Timing G= IY+R= G= G= G= G= G= G= G= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Prelinled ur Actuuled ._1 Protected turns __� Permitted turns -------Pedestrian Cycle Length Sec 9-76 URBAN STREETS VOLUME ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET O ® O © © © O O O 9 ppr. Mvt. Mvt. Peak Flow Lane Flow rate Number Lane Adj. Prop. Volume Hour Rate Group in Lane of Lanes Utilization Flow of (vph) Factor v Group N Factor v LT or RT PHF (VA va U (vph) P,. or PRT ® (vph] Table 9-4 0 X QQ LT (, `1 q EB TH No 1,0U ILIO cT RT 0 '2y 9 -jyc I (,UC) PH 1U()lu 1+ � LT Lr WB TH J 1,06 M 37IR� RT LT � � I � 5 195 1, Uv I`�S LT NB TH tp7 IOq �0 110LI ET RT of U LT 0 y SB TH W 1 �l �i l qqq I,Oc? �51( RT �? G SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-77 SATL;RATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET LANE GROUPS O Ideal Sat. Flow (pcphgpl) O No. of Lanes N ADTUSTMENT FACTORS Adj. Sat. Flow Rate s (vphg) O Appr. ® Lane Group Movements © Lane Width f„ © Heavy Veh f O Grade f e O Pkg. f O Bus Blockage f,, ® Area Ty e fp O Right Turn fRT > ® Left Turn f, T Table 9-5 Table 9-6 Table 9-7 Table 9-8 Table 9-9 Table 9-10 Table 9-11 Table 9-12 EB _:. ,99 I,vv (.uu 1,00 — 1%()0 tK ,q°I (.uv (,Jv i'uv WB Noo I ,IS 1,00 �,()1 I,ou I.�u l.uv ILI 6� lu`iq o0 LUG 9g (,vu NB i�i I` lsuo I,UV (,c1u 1,00 (,Jv qq l 17LI6 SB +`� �� I��o a I.av I.�U I.Uv L�U I.CJU (,G0 �� �I -3Qg3 9-78 URBAN STREETS SUPPLEMENTAL WORKSHEET FOR LEFT -TURN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR, fLT INPUT VARIABLES EB WB NB SB Cycle Length, C (sec) U Q �0 '�- U Effective Green, g (sec) 7 y 9 q a' Number of Lanes, N C7 3 Total Approach Flow Rate, v, (vph) C( 6'( 9 5`i I (q `1 Ll Mainline Flow Rate, v,,, (vph) 3�j q 5 `{ ( Lj l Left -Turn Flow Rate, vLT (vph) il 1 < ( (( y Proportion of I.T, PST y 9 .0 Opposing Lanes, N. a Opposing Flow Rate, v. (vph) $ I y y L4 Ll3 Prop. of LT in Opp. Vol., P,To COMPUTATIONS EB W B NB SB S r = 1800 N„ l +P,ic> [400 + vM 1400—v., Y,. = v„ / S.,,, g.=(g—CY„)/(I—Y„) f, _ (875 — 0.625 v„) / 1000 Pi PST = l + C (N-1)gl f,g + 4.5 gy=g-91, PT=1—PL g, = 2 P, 11 — PT 0.5 g,l P, Jj EL = 1800 / (1400 — v„) fm=g1+g° g g[1+P,(E,—l) 1 +2(l+.PI) g f,T=(fm+N-1)/N ,�3 .G S.S , qj SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-79 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LANE GROUP p Adj. Flow (vFh) O Ad'. Sat. F ow Rate (vphg) ® Flow Ratio v/s — ® ® Green Ratio g/C O Lane Group Capacity c (vPh) C4,xp v/c Ratio X _ Critical ? Lane Group A PPr. Lane GroupRate Movements EB -=7 i`I(� 990 .141 .a115 a►U .467 -�� �`�9 13�� • IY6, ,3375 y51 S5 WB 16 ( 1 .1r9 Ia�J aa3 -ILII Jy5 11V9 .la`s , W5 '776 1'67 NB F 11oy 1196 63a 'Goo 12ov .qao SB 151U '3aL13 Li67 . 5a5o Cycle Length, C �i U sec E (v/s)'; _ °t Lost Time Per Cycle, L sec a (v/s)d X C (Jr x_ _ _ C—L 9-80 URBAN STREETS LEVEGOfLSERVICE WORKSHEET Lane Group First Term Delay Second Term Delay 1btal Delay & LOS O Appr. O Lane Group Move- ments O v/c Ratio X © Green Ratio g/C © Cycle Length C (sec) © Delay d, (sec/veh) O Lane Group Capacity c. (vph) O Delay dz (sec/veh) O Progression Factor PF Table 9-13 ® Lane Group Delay (sec/veh) (® F®) X ® » Lane Group LOS Table 9-1 @ Approach Delay (sec/veh) 0 Appr. LOS Table 9-1 EB = 667 .115 �d 21.) a t v 1. 1, u 0 —y 55 2 .33h5 �U 16, y y 51 1. 1,00 17, 5 C_ wB .-,-1 q .2115 �o 2a. q 223 �� 1, v o 31. 2 NB` 3, y 776 a o t, v U 3. N A IC` 3 I .q2U 1aoo . SB + gq 5�50 �o �� . `1 1703 41, 5 !, v v 17, q C Intersection Delay 111 � G sec/veh Intersection LOS C (Table 9-1) APPENDIX D INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSES SHELBURNE ROAD/408 SHELBURNE ROAD FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 10-37 WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF T INTERSECTIONS LOCATION: y(��i�Ct_3�►�n1C �U�i� 11 NAME: �5/Jr5 31/U�6 HOURLY VOLUMES VOLUMES IN PCPH Major Street: SNCL$Uy,,r_ I�ur,O GN N = QVS � U V s /) 5 — iz37 V2--� V4 — z 13 Grade IU.� V2 V4 0% -a- V3 �N=O V3 !T1V V7 V9 Date of Counts: 1986 �DN 1-4IgoFn STOP L Time Period: ❑ YIELD Average Running Speed: c) N = IQ TPucK—, 3 i. (TNAuu�N otj,_ri Minor Street: PHF: �`( Grade % `i()'K S��ccgukNE �. VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement No. 2 3 4 5 7 9 Volume (vph) /�237 / / / 5 /6 y3 / 7 /2 Vol. (pcph), see Table 10-1 STEP 1: RT from Minor Street r► V9 Conflicting Flow, Vc 1/2 V3 + V2 = 5 + 6 i = 69y vph (Vc9) Critical Gap, Tc , and Potential Capacity, cP Tc = 5,5 sec (Table 10-2) eP9 = 54o pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm Cm9 = CP9 = V U pcph STEP 2: IT From Major Street t V4 Conflicting Flow, Vc V3 + V2 a + �237 =� vph (Vc4) Critical Gap, Tc , and Potential Capacity, cP Tc = 5. S sec (Table 10-2) cp4 = L D pcph (Fig. 10-3) Percent of cp Utilized and Impedance Factor (Fig. 10-5) (v4/cP4) X 100 = `l P4 = .97 Actual Capacity, cm Crti4 = cp4 = °(yypcph STEP 3: IT From Minor Street ' V, Conflicting Flow, Vc 1/2 V3+V2+VS+V4 = 5 +�)3' + 1643 + �S = 2 %� vph (Vc7) Critical Gap, Tc , and Potential Capacity, cP Tc = 7, U sec (Table 10-2) y = 2 a pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm Cm7 = CP7 X P4 = �a X Y7 — a / pcph SHARED -LANE CAPACITY y7 + v9 if lane is shared SH = (V7/Cm7) + (V9/Cm9) Movement No. v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph)_ cR LOS 7 ) i 'd l q E 9 / 2 5y0 5a A 4 15 ago has C M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Re: January 28, 1986 agenda items Date: January 23, 1986 2) JOHN LARKIN, 408 SHELBURNE ROAD Steve Stitzel our City Attorney has confirmed that we may require level of service traffic data and a full traffic study from this applicant. His position is that this application was handled incorrectly to begin with and left the Commission with a problem. The Commission has the discretion to review this as a planned commercial development and deny it for not meeting the four acre requirement. However, he suggested it may be better to compromise and require a traffic study for this one case. Burlington Planning Director,Mark Eldridge, told me that Burlington would require a traffic study for this type of development. They have no formal criteria of how to review the study; however they informally use level of service "C" as a cut off, as we do. I suggest that you require John Larkin to submit a traffic study indicating the present and post development levels of service at designated intersections. If he chooses not to, the Commission should deny the site plan application for lack of sufficient traffic data or allow him to formally withdraw his application. 3) HACKETT, VALINE AND MACDONALD, 140 KENNEDY DRIVE The applicant has purchased the 18,000 square foot office building at 140 Kennedy Drive from Pizzagalli Corporation. HVM proposes to convert 2650 square feet of the 6000'square foot basement to use- able space. It is presently unfinished. Originally, the Planning Commission granted site plan approval to Pizzagalli for a 12,000 square foot office on two floors. Upon investigation, David Spitz discovered two floors and a full basement had been constructed. He put them on notice for violation of the site plan and use of the basement was denied. This applicant wants to convert the basement to a kitchen, lounge and conference facilities. No additional offices will be in the basement. The construction cost is estimated at $265,500. Forty eight parking spaces exist to meet the parking requirements of the 12,000 square foot office; the applicant feels these are sufficient. The 2,650 square feet will require 11 additional spaces representing a 19% waiver. The site can not handle additional spaces. PLANNING COMMISSION 28 JANUARY 1986 " --The---South"Burlington -Planning°Coinmission hreld-ve--regular meeting on Tuesday, 28 January 1986, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hail, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Mary -Barbara Maher, Chairman; Catherine Peacock, John Belter, William Burgess, Judith Hurd, Peter Jacob Others Present Jane Lafleur, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Amy Justice, State Dept. of Agriculture; Fred Hackett, Alan Gigure, David Spitz, Mery Brown, Bob Powell Minutes of 14 January 1986 Ms. Hurd moved that the Minutes of 14 January 1986 be approved as printed. Ms. Peacock seconded, and the motion passed unan- imously. 2. Continue site 21an a lication of John Larkin for construction of a 6,912 sq. ft. office building at Z8 Shelburne Rd. - Mrs. Maher reminded the Commission that they had the option of reviewing the application as a pcd and rejecting it because it did not meet the 4-acre lot minimum. In polling the Commission, concensus was that members would require a traffic study. Mr. Blanchard indicated that they then would propably opt to come back with only one building. He added that because he felt two buildings was a better alternative, he Wou-1d like members to re- consider and let them use the traffic overlay as a study. Mrs. Maher indicated it was the Commission's wish that a traffic study be done. Mrs. Hurd then moved that the applicant be asked to come back with a revised plan or with a traffic study within 60 days o January �, b. nr the i fin ;�1 a1n an 1 i r, i nn "c,ai 1 1 hp antnmatically Beni Mr. Jacob seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. Site plan aZplication of Hackett Valine & MacDonald for con- struction of an additional } s`q. ft. of o ice space within existing ui ink at 140 Kennedy Drive Mrs. Lafleur advised that an earlier Commission had given approval for 2 floors. It had then been discovered that a basement had been constructed. The ovr<zer at that time was informed tha— the basement area could. not be used. The current applicant is re- questing -approval to use 2,650 sq. ft. of that basement. Mr. Hackett eXplaintd that they were not aware of the previous problem when they bought the building and only learned of it when they applied for a building permit. They bought the PLANNING COMMISSION 14 JANUARY 1986 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a Regular Meeting on Tuesday, 14 January 1986, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Mary -Barbara Maher, Chairman; Judith Hurd, John Belter, John Dooley, Peter Jacob, William Burgess, Catherine Peacock Others Present Jane Bechtel Lafleur, City Planner; Ralph Deslauriers, Jr, Todd Wulfson, Rick Davis, David Spitz, Sandra Dooley, Doris Dunkley, Marilyn Leggett, Fred Taylor, Reba Drabble, Barbara Hamel, M. Hamel, Kathy Racine, Miriam Oakes, William Oakes, J. Davis, Herbert Davis, Dr. Carpenter, Mrs. Rye, John Larkin, Robert Blanchard, Mery Brown; Sid Poger, The Other Paper, 17e{ZRY_V. POW K,, Mrs. Maher welcomed Ms. Peacock, the new member of the Com- mission. I," Review Minutes of 12 December and 17 December 1985 Ms. Hurd moved that the minutes of 12 December 1985 be approved as written. Mr. Belter seconded, and the motion passed 6-0 with Ms. Peacock abstaining. Mr. Dooley moved that the minutes of 17 December 1985 be approved as written. Mr. Belter seconded, and the motion passed 6-0 with Ms. Peacock abstaining. ,,,Site Plan application of LTH, Inc., for construction of a 6912 sq. ft. office in conjunction with existing restaurant at 408 Shelburne Road Mrs. Lafleur advised that the Zoning Board had been classifying multiple uses of a lot as a conditional use. The City Attorney advised that the Zoning Board has the power to approve only multiple uses within one structure. However, they gave this a multiple use approval for two structures. The Ordinance states the Planning Commission may approve multiple uses in multiple buildings on a lot as a planned commercial development, and a planned commercial development requires four acres. Since this plan does not have 4 acres, it is not a planned commer-cial development, and it is not a conditional use that the Zoning Board had the power to approve. Therefore, the Com-mission is considering it as a site plan as has been done in the past. It is hoped that this situation can be prevented in the future. Mr. Blanchard explained that this will be two separate PLANNING COMMISSION 14 JANUARY 1985 PAGE 2 businesses. They would close the southern curb cut on Shel- burne Rd. and landscape the front. It is now mostly black- top to the property line. In the rear, they propose to re- place or repair the existing fence, as stipulated by the Zoning Board. The would extend the rear paving another 20 feet on the southern half of the rear yard, and in exchange will landscape the front yard. Drainage would tie into an existing catch basin. Mrs. Lafleur noted they will be required to submit a drainage plan prior to permit. Blanchard advised they have not yet gotten permission from the City of Burlington to put in a sidewalk. Mrs. Maher stressed this will be part of the Commission's approval. After a brief discussion, members agreed that perpendicular parking would be preferable. Mrs. Lafleur said there are 2 critical points: road, water and sewer depend on the City of Burlington. The Commission can grant approval contingent upon Burlington's approval. Even more critical is the traffic issue. Projections show traffic is under the standard but this does not measure the ability of Shelburne Rd. to handle the added traffic. Mr. Dooley said expressed concern that the only reason a traffic study is not being required is that the lot is under 4 acres, which is allowing the applicant to avoid the traffic standard. Mr. Jacob felt the applicant should comply with the traffic standards of Burlington since it is a Burlington street. Mr. Dooley stressed that this is close to some of the city's worst intersections. Mrs. Lafleur will check with Burlington to see what their standards are. Mr. Dooley asked if Mrs. Lafleur could also check with -the City Attorney to see if this development could be required to have a level of service study. Members agreed to postpone further discussion until these questions could be answered. Other questions to be answered include whether the grass strip denies Fire Department access to one side of a building. Ms. Peacock mentioned that there had been concern at the Zoning Board as to whether there might be an attempt to tie-in with the next lot and thus to Proctor Avenue. ?j Sketch plan application of Ralph Deslauriers, Jr. for a 5- unit residential development located at 46 East Terrace During the discussion, Mr. Dooley stepped down, as he is a resident on East Terrace. Mr. Deslauriers explained that the project, named Stony Hill, is 3/4 of the way up East Terrace, just before the start of the newer houses. The 1.29 acre lot is zoned R-4. He is